![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
>> I agree. I think that one previous -stable patch version should always >> be listed there, even if we think that 2.6.N is stable. :) > >I don't at all. If we do that, people will assume that they need to >wait till 2.6.N.1 before trying that kernel (as it wouldn't be "stable" >otherwise.) So no one will test it, to really generate the bug reports >that we need to get to that .1 release. > >Or should we just throw out a .1 release with the first simple patch >that comes along just to make the kernel.org page update properly? I >don't think so... > Or call the "2.6.X" as "2.6.X.0", so they got at least a clue that this is becoming .1 Jan Engelhardt -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-01-05 07:32 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||